2

The following sentence I read from Huff Post: "Why Egypt Matters: The Implications Of The Protests" gets me quite confused. I've made the key problem boldface. Hope someone can explain to me the position of the Obama administration and what the boldface part means.

The Obama administration -- from Joe Biden, who refused to call Mubarak a dictator, to Obama himself, who emphasized Egypt's role as an ally -- has been loathe to fully distance itself from Mubarak, and finds itself in a difficult position, reports theAtlantic.

The original link of the article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/29/why-egypt-matters_n_815863.html#s232358&title=Strong_US_Ally

Improve this question
1
  • The link is effectively broken (at least it now contains none of the quoted here).
    – Peter Mortensen
    Commented Jan 1, 2019 at 23:25

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

Omitting the phrase set off in em dashes, the sentence becomes:

The Obama administration has been loathe to fully distance itself from Mubarak.

It uses loathe in this sense:

loath, or loth; also loathe, adj. : characterized by unwillingness to do something contrary to one's tastes, likes, sympathies, or ways of thinking

It means that the Obama administration has been unwilling to separate itself and U.S. interests from former Egyptian President Mubarak, a long-time U.S. ally.

Note that while loath (or, as Tim Lymington notes, loth) is likely the more common form to use in this context, you can make the case for loathe as well:

loathe, tr. v. : to feel strong aversion for : have extreme disgust at

In this sense, the Obama administration would be averse to breaking ties with Mubarak.

Improve this answer
6
  • 1
    In British English, I think loth is commoner, and loathe is not used precisely because of ambiguity (also, the pronunciation would be different.)
    – Tim Lymington
    Commented Jul 10, 2012 at 11:18
  • @TimLymington Oddly, the British edition of Macmillan doesn't list loth as alternative to loath. The pronunciations it lists do differ between British (/ləʊθ/) and American (/loʊθ/), however.
    – Gnawme
    Commented Jul 10, 2012 at 15:41
  • 1
    I've never seen the spelling loathe for the adjectival form -- and it's typically pronounced with the hard th (like "thick"). I've never seen loth at all.
    – Michael Lorton
    Commented Jul 10, 2012 at 15:47
  • @Malvolio Although I wouldn't use it myself, M-W Unabridged lists loathe as an acceptable alternate spelling for the adjectival form of loath. I've seen loth, but I'm not sure if it was in a contemporary work.
    – Gnawme
    Commented Jul 10, 2012 at 16:00
  • I agree with Malvolio, I have only ever seen 'loath' - sometimes one variant carries the torch whilst the rest fall by the wayside. And the th is certainly unvoiced as in 'thick'.
    – Barry Brown
    Commented Jul 10, 2012 at 16:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .